If you want to describe the Creationist position, all you need to do is read Genesis 1-11 out loud. If you want to describe the old earth position, you can do the same thing, but conclude with "and now let me explain why all of that was wrong..."
Every time an old earth Creationist claims the Bible isn't supposed to be taken literally, they are admitting that the Biblical Creationist position really is the Biblical Creationist position, because it's what the Bible says. By logical extension, therefore, they must admit that it is likely, maybe even inevitable, that a first-time Bible reader, lacking any prior knowledge of God, will naturally come to the conclusion that God created the universe in 6 days, including man.
Historically, there have been a minority of people who took a different approach. Augustine, for example, frequently appears in these debates because of his misunderstanding earlier on in his life (for which he eventually repented). Augustine believed Sirach was part of the Bible, and he had a faulty translation of it. Therefore, based on Sirach 18:1, Augustine believed the 6 days were representative of an instant.
What you will notice, however, is that Augustine and his ilk unanimously went in the opposite direction from old earth Creationism. Augustine himself still believed the earth was around 6,000 years old, that the flood really happened, and that the symbolism in Genesis is minimal. No one, up until the 19th century, ever attempted to cram millions of years into Genesis. This is because it is so far from what the text says that even if you try desperately to say the text is symbolic, it simply fails as a symbol of old earth philosophy. Therefore, anyone who tries to fit old earth philosophies into the text is kidding themselves. A literal, 6 day creation roughly 6,000 years ago has been the dominant interpretation for 3,400 years for a reason: it is clearly superior.